Bombardier union chiefs launch attack over bribery

Union leaders are demanding an explanation from the Government over why it awarded the £1.4 billion Thameslink rail contract to Siemens while the German company was at the centre of a worldwide bribery scandal.

British trainmaker Bombardier lost out in the deal, leaving 1,400 workers in Derby facing the sack.

According to EU procurement rules, Britain could have excluded Siemens from the bidding because it had admitted bribery on a massive scale and agreed to pay £730 million in fines.

Action: Union leaders are demanding an explanation from the Government over why it awarded the £1.4 billion Thameslink rail contract to Siemens

It was banned from World Bank contracts for two years from 2008. It was at this time that the Government was doing business with Siemens.

Article 45 in an EU directive of 2004 says participants convicted of corruption may be excluded from bidding.

More...

But this is a matter of discretion. Diana Holland, assistant general secretary of Britain’s biggest union, Unite, said: ‘We have a number of significant legal and technical questions that we will be putting to the Government.

‘On the basis that the contract will not be signed until the end of the year, we believe that it is not too late for a rethink on the Government’s disastrous decision.’

The Department for Transport said: ‘For convictions to give rise to the requirement to exclude Siemens from the Thameslink rolling stock project, those individuals involved in the activities that resulted in convictions would need to be in a position of power of representation, decision or control of Siemens.

‘The Department investigated the position at the pre-qualification stage and was satisfied this was not the case and consequently the Department does not consider there were grounds to exclude Siemens.’

Siemens said it was now ‘fundamentally reformed’ and was regarded as a model company.

Professor Chris Bovis, a European law expert from the University of Hull, said: ‘It defies belief for the Government to assume that Article 45 of the EU directive applies only to individuals and not corporations. The individuals are not acting for themselves – they are doing it on behalf of the company.’